ArticleBMJ case reports2015
Paratesticular liposarcoma and contralateral angiolipoma in a 60-year-old patient.
Article in BMJ case reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Second Primary Malignancies in Patients with Well-differentiated/Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma.Anticancer research · 2018Article
- Management and Excision of a 15 cm Paratesticular Angiolipoma.Urology case reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present the case of a 60-year-old man who was referred with a 1-year history of a slow-growing right scrotal lump. Following surgical excision together with a radical orchidectomy, the histological diagnosis was of a paratesticular dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Radiological staging showed no metastatic disease. Six months later the patient presented with a new left scrotal lump, which was felt to be separate from the testis. Owing to the previous history of a liposarcoma and indeterminate ultrasound findings, this was surgically excised without orchidectomy. Histological analysis showed this to be an angiolipoma. The patient remained on clinical and radiological surveillance. Paratesticular tumours are rare neoplasms and liposarcomas of the spermatic cord only represent 7% of these lesions. Any link between lipomatous tumours and liposarcomas remains controversial and is still under investigation. This is the first case to report a paratesticular liposarcoma and a contralateral angiolipoma in the same patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.